Iain has signed the Holocaust memorial book as part of events to commemorate the 67th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. The infamous concentration camp is one of the sites of the largest mass murder in history, where 6 million Jews and others classed as “undesirable” by the Nazis were murdered. Auschwitz was liberated on January 27th 1945.

The book has been placed in the House of Commons by the Holocaust Educational Trust to give MPs the opportunity to honour the memory of those persecuted and murdered during the Holocaust.

Iain said:

“I pay tribute to the Holocaust Education Trust for educating the younger generation on the dangers of allowing hatred and persecution to take hold in society. International Holocaust Memorial Day marks the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and is an important opportunity to remember the victims of both the Holocaust and of all genocides.

We must remember the lessons of the Holocaust and the years of hatred and persecution that preceded it. We should use this as an opportunity to renew our commitment to challenging all kinds of discrimination and prejudice, which sadly continues in our society to this day.”

As I write this, I am in Westminster waiting to vote on the Welfare Reform Bill, which is a piece of proposed legislation put forward by the Government to change provision on benefits.

How the country provides benefits for people considered to need help, the level of those benefits and for how long people can continue to claim those benefits naturally exercise a lot of people. I think I share the view of most people in the town: the welfare state is an important symbol of our country’s decency and concern for society as a whole, especially the vulnerable. If a person finds themselves out of work, or is sick or disabled, I think the state should play a part in assisting them in the costs of living. I wouldn’t want to go back to a situation, which we certainly had in the past, where people starved or were sent to the workhouse once they found themselves out of work or became old.

But, equally, I wouldn’t want to see people or families living on benefits for years at a time, or across the generations. There are a number of reasons for this: first, because people on benefits have a lower standard of living, and I believe everybody should have the opportunity to improve their quality of life. I also think, good old-fashioned puritan that I am, that hard work is good for the soul. I was brought up by my parents and grandparents to feel a sense of achievement from a job well done or to feel satisfied at the end of a hard day’s work. I’m not suggesting for one minute that my job is hard physical work like a manual worker or someone going down the pit, but I do feel better about myself when I have worked hard.

I also live in the real world, and I know full well that people often fell very aggrieved when they see people who flout the system. There are many hard working people in Hartlepool, who rise early in the morning, often have two or three jobs to make ends meet, go to bed late at night exhausted and don’t ask for any handouts. They often see people living in the same street who don’t work but seem to have a great standard of living. I think often benefit scroungers are portrayed in the media as being far more widespread than they actually are, but they do exist and the whole notion of the welfare state breaks down when hard working taxpayers feel that their taxes are misused.

This is the context in which the Government is bringing forward its Welfare Reform Bill. The House of Lords has inflicted a series of defeats on the legislation, and now that today it has passed back to the Commons I will be voting to agree with the Lords. This is because I don’t think the Bill tackles the problem properly. I believe unemployment is the biggest problem facing Hartlepool at the moment, and the Bill does not contain one single provision to help people into work. It seems ludicrous to me that the Government cuts demand, reduces expenditure and forces unemployment up to its highest level for 18 years, and then cuts the level of support available for people who have been made jobless. I want to see the Government concentrating on creating jobs. The Bill is also mean-spirited and vindictive towards people who are the most vulnerable in society and who are suffering from the most horrific illnesses. It cuts off Employment and Support Allowance after just 12 months for people recovering from cancer and mental health problems. It also cuts in half the support for disabled children. In a supposedly civilised society, that surely can’t be right.

I don’t oppose the need for welfare reform. But this is not the right type of legislation, and the Government’s priorities, in the week when it agreed to Stephen Hester’s bonus of £1 million at the same time as taking support from disabled children, seem simply wrong.

It is a sad fact of life that people’s health in Hartlepool is not as good as the rest of the country. We tend to suffer more from ill-health, obesity, alcohol related issues and smoking and, as a result, endure heart attacks, cancer and strokes.

Life expectancy in Hartlepool is lower than other parts of the country – a Hartlepool boy born today would be expected to live until he was 75.9 years’ old, some two years below the national average. A little girl from the town born today could expect to live until she was 81 years’ old which, although is better than a similar girl born in Middlesbrough, Gateshead, South Tyneside or Sunderland, would expect to live a full year shorter than the national average.

These figures have improved quite dramatically in the last fifteen years or so. This is because of significant increases in health funding, a greater emphasis on prevention, more investment focused on primary health care such as GPs and generally rising living standards as the economy grew.

However, the situation is actually much worse than those figures suggest. The information masks huge differences in life expectancy within the town. Someone living in Stranton, Dyke House or Owton Manor would expect to die up to 11 years earlier than somebody living close to Ward Jackson Park. That can’t be right in a civilised society that where you live or your postcode can determine how long you live.

This week, there was a Parliamentary debate in the House of Commons to discuss health inequalities in the North East and I attended to champion Hartlepool’s case. There are a number of reasons why we suffer in Hartlepool from ill health and poor life expectancy. One of the reasons is our historical legacy as a place of heavy manufacturing, which means that we have more of a problem than other parts of the country with industrial diseases and injuries. I particularly wanted to highlight to Parliament my concern over the delay in helping people suffering from asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma.

However, the biggest factor in terms of health is the economy. Being unemployed is often the same as being unwell and there is a very clear link between deprivation, low levels of income and ill health. I fear – and this is something I emphasised in the Parliamentary debate – that a worsening economic situation will make health matters much worse and that those poor life expectancy figures will deteriorate over the next few years.

The Minister’s response in the debate was stunning in not answering any of the questions I asked, including on the future of Hartlepool Hospital. However, she and other Ministers cannot hide their heads in the sand. Economic problems will lead to further health problems, and people’s well being will suffer.